Prevention and therapy of fungal infection in severe acute pancreatitis: A prospective clinical study

Pancreatic colonization of fungi in the development of severe acute pancreatitis

Acute pancreatitis is a common emergent disorder, a significant population of which develops the life-threatening condition, called severe acute pancreatitis (SAP). It is generally accepted that bacterial infection is associated with the development and persistence of SAP. In addition to bacterial infection, recent clinical studies disclosed a high incidence of fungal infection in patients with SAP. Moreover, SAP patients with fungal infection exhibit a higher mortality rate than those without infection. Although these clinical studies support pathogenic roles played by fungal infection in SAP, beneficial effects of prophylactic anti-fungal therapy on SAP have not been proved. Here we summarize recent clinical findings as to the relationship between fungal infection and the development of SAP. In addition, we discuss molecular mechanisms accounting for the development of SAP in the presence of fungal infection.

Guidelines for the management of patients with severe acute pancreatitis, 2021

OBJECTIVE

To provide guidelines for the management of the intensive care patient with severe acute pancreatitis.

DESIGN

A consensus committee of 22 experts was convened. A formal conflict-of-interest (COI) policy was developed at the beginning of the process and enforced throughout. The entire guideline construction process was conducted independently of any industrial funding (i.e. pharmaceutical, medical devices). The authors were required to follow the rules of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE®) system to guide assessment of quality of evidence. The potential drawbacks of making strong recommendations in the presence of low-quality evidence were emphasised.

METHODS

The most recent SFAR and SNFGE guidelines on the management of the patient with severe pancreatitis were published in 2001. The literature now is sufficient for an update. The committee studied 14 questions within 3 fields. Each question was formulated in a PICO (Patients Intervention Comparison Outcome) format and the relevant evidence profiles were produced. The literature review and recommendations were made according to the GRADE® methodology.

RESULTS

The experts' synthesis work and their application of the GRADE® method resulted in 24 recommendations. Among the formalised recommendations, 8 have high levels of evidence (GRADE 1+/-) and 12 have moderate levels of evidence (GRADE 2+/-). For 4 recommendations, the GRADE method could not be applied, resulting in expert opinions. Four questions did not find any response in the literature. After one round of scoring, strong agreement was reached for all the recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

There was strong agreement among experts for 24 recommendations to improve practices for the management of intensive care patients with severe acute pancreatitis.

Pancreatic Fungal Infection in Patients With Necrotizing Pancreatitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

GOAL

The goal of this study was to study the incidence of fungal infection in necrotizing pancreatitis (NP) and its impact on mortality.

BACKGROUND

Infected pancreatic necrosis is a major contributor to morbidity and mortality in patients with NP. While pancreatic fungal infection (PFI) has frequently been identified in patients with NP, its effect on the clinical outcomes is unclear.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A literature search was performed in Medline (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), and the Cochrane library. All prospective and retrospective studies that examined the incidence of fungal infection in NP with subgroup mortality data were included. For fungal infection of NP, studies with fungal isolation from pancreatic necrotic tissue were included. Newcastle Ottawa Scale and Joanna Briggs Institute's critical appraisal tool were used for bias assessment.

RESULTS

Twenty-two studies comprising 2151 subjects with NP were included for the quantitative analysis. The mean incidence of fungal infection was 26.6% (572/2151). In-hospital mortality in the pooled sample of NP patients with PFI (N=572) was significantly higher [odds ratio (OR)=3.95, 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.6-5.8] than those without PFI. In a separate analysis of 7 studies, the mean difference in the length of stay between those with and without fungal infection was 22.99 days (95% CI: 14.67-31.3). The rate of intensive care unit admission (OR=3.95; 95% CI: 2.6-5.8), use of prophylactic antibacterials (OR=2.76; 95% CI: 1.31-5.81) and duration of antibacterial therapy (mean difference=8.71 d; 95% CI: 1.33-16.09) were all significantly higher in patients with PFI. Moderate heterogeneity was identified among the studies on estimating OR for mortality (I2=43%) between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

PFI is common in patients with NP and is associated with increased mortality, intensive care unit admission rate, and length of stay. Further prospective studies are needed to better understand the pathophysiology of PFIs and to determine the role for preemptive therapeutic strategies, such as prophylactic antifungal therapy.

Candidemia after endoscopic therapy with lumen-apposing metal stent for pancreatic walled-off necrosis

Necrotizing pancreatitis remains a challenging and unpredictable condition accompanied by various complications. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided transmural drainage and necrosectomy have become the standard treatment for patients with walled-off necrosis (WON). Endoscopic therapy via lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) with large diameters has shown success in the management of pancreatic fluid collections, but there are few data on specific complications of that therapy. We report a case of infected WON and concomitant fungemia following LAMS placement and necrosectomy. In addition, a systematic literature review of current related studies has been provided.

Choosing Optimal Antifungal Agents To Prevent Fungal Infections in Nonneutropenic Critically Ill Patients: Trial Sequential Analysis, Network Meta-analysis, and Pharmacoeconomic Analysis

The use of antifungal interventions in critically ill patients prior to invasive fungal infection (IFI) being microbiologically confirmed and the preferred drug are still controversial. A systematic literature search was performed to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared untargeted antifungal treatments applied to nonneutropenic critically ill patients. The primary outcomes were all-cause mortality and proven IFI rates. A random-effects model was used with trial sequential analyses (TSA), a network meta-analysis (NMA) was conducted to obtain indirect evidence, and a cost-effectiveness analysis using a decision-analytic model was completed from the patient perspective over a lifetime horizon. In total, 19 RCTs involving 2,556 patients (7 interventions) were included. Untargeted antifungal treatment did not significantly decrease the incidence of all-cause mortality (odds ratio [OR] = 0.89, 95% confidence interval [95%CI] = 0.70 to 1.14), but it did reduce the incidence of proven IFI (OR = 0.45, 95%CI = 0.29 to 0.71) relative to placebo/no intervention. The TSA showed that there was sufficient evidence supporting these findings. In the NMA, the only significant difference found for both primary outcomes was between fluconazole and placebo/no intervention in preventing proven IFI (OR = 0.35, 95%CI = 0.19 to 0.65). Based on drug and hospital costs in China, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios per life-year saved for fluconazole, caspofungin, and micafungin relative to placebo/no intervention corresponded to US$889, US$9,994, and US$10,351, respectively. Untargeted antifungal treatment significantly reduced proven IFI rates in nonneutropenic critically ill patients but with no mortality benefits relative to placebo/no intervention. Among the well-tolerated antifungals, fluconazole remains the only one that is effective for IFI prevention and significantly cheaper than echinocandins.

Antifungal Prevention of Systemic Candidiasis in Immunocompetent ICU Adults: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Clinical Trials

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to identify the impact of antifungal prevention in critically ill immunocompetent adult patients on mortality and subsequent infection.

DATA SOURCES

A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing any antifungal use versus placebo to prevent candidiasis in ICU patients were performed.

STUDY SELECTION

Searches were performed on PubMed, Embase, Scopus, main conference proceedings, and ClinicalTrials.gov, as well as reference lists.

DATA EXTRACTION

The primary outcomes were mortality and invasive candidiasis. The secondary outcome was the rate of Candida albicans and nonalbicans strains after treatment. A random effect model was used, and sensitivity analysis was performed for both outcomes. Results are expressed as risk ratios and their 95% CIs.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Nineteen trials (10 with fluconazole, four with ketoconazole, one with itraconazole, three with micafungin, and one with caspofungin) including 2,792 patients were identified. No individual trial showed a decreased mortality rate. Combined analysis showed that preventive antifungal did not decrease mortality (risk ratio, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.74-1.04; p = 0.14) but significantly decreased secondary fungal infections by 50% (risk ratio, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.35-0.68; p = 0.0001). No shift across nonalbicans strains was observed during treatment (risk ratio, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.19-1.97; p = 0.42). However, publication biases preclude any definite conclusions for prevention of infection.

CONCLUSIONS

Antifungal prevention of systemic candidiasis in immunocompetent critically ill adults did not reduce mortality and may have decreased secondary fungal infection rates. However, significant publication bias was present.

Fungal Infections in Patients With Walled-off Pancreatic Necrosis

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to evaluate the influence of fungal infection and antifungal treatment on outcome in patients with walled-off pancreatic necrosis (WON).

METHODS

A retrospective description of fungal infections in a cohort of consecutive patients undergoing endoscopic, transmural drainage and necrosectomy for WON, treated in a tertiary referral center was reviewed.

RESULTS

Between 2005 and 2013, fungal infection in WON was documented in 57 (46%) of 123 patients. The most common isolates at first positive culture were Candida albicans (55%) and Candida glabrata (20%). Thirty-nine (70%) patients were treated with antifungals after the first fungal finding. There was no significant difference in mortality (21% vs 13%, P = 0.517) or organ failure (34% vs 33%, P = 0.903) between the group treated with adequate antifungals after the first fungal finding compared to the group not treated or treated inadequately.The in-hospital mortality was 18% (10 patients). Concomitant fungemia was found in 6 patients, of which 3 died, as opposed to 7 with fungi in the necrosis only (50% vs 14%, P = 0.027).

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates a high incidence and associated high in-hospital mortality of fungal infection in WON, thus emphasizing the importance of fungal infections in WON.

Antifungal agents for preventing fungal infections in non-neutropenic critically ill patients

BACKGROUND

Invasive fungal infections are important causes of morbidity and mortality among critically ill patients. Early institution of antifungal therapy is pivotal for mortality reduction. Starting a targeted antifungal therapy after culture positivity and fungi identification requires a long time. Therefore, alternative strategies (globally defined as 'untargeted antifungal treatments') for antifungal therapy institution in patients without proven microbiological evidence of fungal infections have been discussed by international guidelines. This review was originally published in 2006 and updated in 2016. This updated review provides additional evidence for the clinician dealing with suspicion of fungal infection in critically ill, non-neutropenic patients, taking into account recent findings in this field.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of untargeted treatment with any antifungal drug (either systemic or nonabsorbable) compared to placebo or no antifungal or any other antifungal drug (either systemic or nonabsorbable) in non-neutropenic, critically ill adults and children. We assessed effectiveness in terms of total (all-cause) mortality and incidence of proven invasive fungal infections as primary outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases to February 2015: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (OVID), and EMBASE (OVID). We also searched reference lists of identified studies and major reviews, abstracts of conference proceedings, scientific meetings and clinical trials registries. We contacted experts in the field, study authors and pharmaceutical companies as part of the search strategy.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (irrespective of language or publication status) comparing the use of untargeted treatment with any antifungal drug (either systemic or nonabsorbable) to placebo, no antifungal, or another antifungal agent in non-neutropenic critically ill participants.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three authors independently applied selection criteria, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias. We resolved any discrepancies by discussion. We synthesized data using the random-effects model and expressed the results as risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals. We assessed overall evidence quality using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 22 studies (total of 2761 participants). Of those 22 studies, 12 were included in the original published review and 10 were newly identified. Eleven trials compared the use of fluconazole to placebo or no antifungal treatment. Three trials compared ketoconazole versus placebo. One trial compared anidulafungin with placebo. One trial compared caspofungin to placebo. Two trials compared micafungin to placebo. One trial compared amphotericin B to placebo. Two trials compared nystatin to placebo and one trial compared the effect of clotrimazole, ketoconazole, nystatin and no treatment. We found two new ongoing studies and four new studies awaiting classification. The RCTs included participants of both genders with wide age range, severity of critical illness and clinical characteristics. Funding sources from pharmaceutical companies were reported in 11 trials and one trial reported funding from a government agency. Most of the studies had an overall unclear risk of bias for key domains of this review (random sequence generation, allocation concealment, incomplete outcome data). Two studies had a high risk of bias for key domains. Regarding the other domains (blinding of participants and personnel, outcome assessment, selective reporting, other bias), most of the studies had a low or unclear risk but four studies had a high risk of bias.There was moderate grade evidence that untargeted antifungal treatment did not significantly reduce or increase total (all-cause) mortality (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.09, P value = 0.36; participants = 2374; studies = 19). With regard to the outcome of proven invasive fungal infection, there was low grade evidence that untargeted antifungal treatment significantly reduced the risk (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.83, P value = 0.0001; participants = 2024; studies = 17). The risk of fungal colonization was significantly reduced (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.97, P value = 0.03; participants = 1030; studies = 12) but the quality of evidence was low. There was no difference in the risk of developing superficial fungal infection (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.29, P value = 0.24; participants = 662; studies = 5; low grade of evidence) or in adverse events requiring cessation of treatment between the untargeted treatment group and the other group (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.27, P value = 0.51; participants = 1691; studies = 11; low quality of evidence). The quality of evidence for the outcome of total (all-cause) mortality was moderate due to limitations in study design. The quality of evidence for the outcome of invasive fungal infection, superficial fungal infection, fungal colonization and adverse events requiring cessation of therapy was low due to limitations in study design, non-optimal total population size, risk of publication bias, and heterogeneity across studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is moderate quality evidence that the use of untargeted antifungal treatment is not associated with a significant reduction in total (all-cause) mortality among critically ill, non-neutropenic adults and children compared to no antifungal treatment or placebo. The untargeted antifungal treatment may be associated with a reduction of invasive fungal infections but the quality of evidence is low, and both the heterogeneity and risk of publication bias is high.Further high-quality RCTs are needed to improve the strength of the evidence, especially for more recent and less studied drugs (e.g. echinocandins). Future trials should adopt standardized definitions for microbiological outcomes (e.g. invasive fungal infection, colonization) to reduce heterogeneity. Emergence of resistance to antifungal drugs should be considered as outcome in studies investigating the effects of untargeted antifungal treatment to balance risks and benefit.

A randomized, placebo-controlled trial of preemptive antifungal therapy for the prevention of invasive candidiasis following gastrointestinal surgery for intra-abdominal infections

Patients undergoing emergency gastrointestinal surgery for intra-abdominal infection are at high risk for invasive candidiasis. This exploratory clinical trial could not provide evidence that a preemptive antifungal treatment strategy was effective in this patient group.

Background. Patients undergoing emergency gastrointestinal surgery for intra-abdominal infection are at risk of invasive candidiasis (IC) and candidates for preemptive antifungal therapy.

Methods. This exploratory, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial assessed a preemptive antifungal approach with micafungin (100 mg/d) in intensive care unit patients requiring surgery for intra-abdominal infection. Coprimary efficacy variables were the incidence of IC and the time from baseline to first IC in the full analysis set; an independent data review board confirmed IC. An exploratory biomarker analysis was performed using logistic regression.

Results. The full analysis set comprised 124 placebo- and 117 micafungin-treated patients. The incidence of IC was 8.9% for placebo and 11.1% for micafungin (difference, 2.24%; [95% confidence interval, −5.52 to 10.20]). There was no difference between the arms in median time to IC. The estimated odds ratio showed that patients with a positive (1,3)-β-d-glucan (ßDG) result were 3.66 (95% confidence interval, 1.01–13.29) times more likely to have confirmed IC than those with a negative result.

Conclusions. This study was unable to provide evidence that preemptive administration of an echinocandin was effective in preventing IC in high-risk surgical intensive care unit patients with intra-abdominal infections. This may have been because the drug was administered too late to prevent IC coupled with an overall low number of IC events. It does provide some support for using ßDG to identify patients at high risk of IC.

Clinical Trials Registration. NCT01122368.

Japanese guidelines for the management of acute pancreatitis: Japanese Guidelines 2015

BACKGROUND

Japanese (JPN) guidelines for the management of acute pancreatitis were published in 2006. The severity assessment criteria for acute pancreatitis were later revised by the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (MHLW) in 2008, leading to their publication as the JPN Guidelines 2010. Following the 2012 revision of the Atlanta Classifications of Acute Pancreatitis, in which the classifications of regional complications of pancreatitis were revised, the development of a minimally invasive method for local complications of pancreatitis spread, and emerging evidence was gathered and revised into the JPN Guidelines.

METHODS

A comprehensive evaluation was carried out on the evidence for epidemiology, diagnosis, severity, treatment, post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis and clinical indicators, based on the concepts of the GRADE system (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation). With the graded recommendations, where the evidence was unclear, Meta-Analysis team for JPN Guidelines 2015 conducted an additional new meta-analysis, the results of which were included in the guidelines.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine questions were prepared in 17 subject areas, for which 43 recommendations were made. The 17 subject areas were: Diagnosis, Diagnostic imaging, Etiology, Severity assessment, Transfer indication, Fluid therapy, Nasogastric tube, Pain control, Antibiotics prophylaxis, Protease inhibitor, Nutritional support, Intensive care, management of Biliary Pancreatitis, management of Abdominal Compartment Syndrome, Interventions for the local complications, Post-ERCP pancreatitis and Clinical Indicator (Pancreatitis Bundles 2015). Meta-analysis was conducted in the following four subject areas based on randomized controlled trials: (1) prophylactic antibiotics use; (2) prophylactic pancreatic stent placement for the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis; (3) prophylactic non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis; and (4) peritoneal lavage. Using the results of the meta-analysis, recommendations were graded to create useful information. In addition, a mobile application was developed, which made it possible to diagnose, assess severity and check pancreatitis bundles.

CONCLUSIONS

The JPN Guidelines 2015 were prepared using the most up-to-date methods, and including the latest recommended medical treatments, and we are confident that this will make them easy for many clinicians to use, and will provide a useful tool in the decision-making process for the treatment of patients, and optimal medical support. The free mobile application and calculator for the JPN Guidelines 2015 is available via http://www.jshbps.jp/en/guideline/jpn-guideline2015.html.

Role of antibiotic prophylaxis in necrotizing pancreatitis: a meta-analysis

Several studies have yielded conflicting results on the role of antibiotic prophylaxis in improving outcomes in acute necrotizing pancreatitis. A meta-analysis was carried out to investigate the impact of antibiotic prophylaxis in the incidence of infected pancreatic necrosis and mortality.

METHODOLOGY

Randomized controlled trials and cohort studies investigating impact of prophylactic systemic antibiotic used in acute necrotizing pancreatitis were retrieved from online databases. An overall analysis was done with all studies (Group 1), followed by subgroup analyses with randomized controlled trials (Group 2) and cohort studies (Group 3). Risk ratios (RR) were calculated for the impact of antibiotic prophylaxis in the incidence of infected pancreatic necrosis and mortality in each group using random effects model.

RESULTS

Eleven studies involving 864 patients were included. No significant differences in the incidence of infected pancreatic necrosis were observed with prophylactic antibiotic use in all groups. Prophylactic antibiotic use was not associated with significant differences in all-cause mortality in Group 2 (RR = 0.75; p = 0.24) but was associated with a reduction in Groups 1 (RR = 0.66, p = 0.02) and 3 (RR = 0.55, p = 0.04). There was no statistical difference in the incidence of fungal infections and surgical interventions.

CONCLUSION

Antibiotic prophylaxis does not significantly reduce the incidence of infected pancreatic necrosis but may affect all-cause mortality in acute necrotizing pancreatitis.

Candida and severe acute pancreatitis: we won't be fooled again

Several studies have suggested a role of candida in infected cases of severe acute pancreatitis. This commentary reports high incidence and mortality rates of candida infection in this setting and demonstrates the value of the colonization index to detect patients at risk for fungal infection. These findings indicate the need to review the place of antifungal therapy and prophylaxis.

Occurrence, presentation and treatment of candidemia

Candida is one of the most common causes of nosocomial bloodstream infections. Candidemia is not confined to hematological patients, intensive care units or abdominal surgery wards, but it is remarkably frequent in the internal medicine setting. High mortality associated with candidemia can be reduced by prompt, appropriate antifungal therapy. The epidemiology of species has been shifting toward non-albicans strains. Significant improvements in nonculture-based diagnostic methods, such as serological markers, have been made in recent years, and novel diagnostic techniques should be further studied to enable early pre-emptive therapy. Treatment guidelines indicate that echinocandins are at present the best choice for patients who are severely ill or possibly infected with fluconazole-resistant strains.

Canadian clinical practice guidelines for invasive candidiasis in adults

Candidemia and invasive candidiasis (C/IC) are life-threatening opportunistic infections that add excess morbidity, mortality and cost to the management of patients with a range of potentially curable underlying conditions. The Association of Medical Microbiology and Infectious Disease Canada developed evidence-based guidelines for the approach to the diagnosis and management of these infections in the ever-increasing population of at-risk adult patients in the health care system. Over the past few years, a new and broader understanding of the epidemiology and pathogenesis of C/IC has emerged and has been coupled with the availability of new antifungal agents and defined strategies for targeting groups at risk including, but not limited to, acute leukemia patients, hematopoietic stem cell transplants and solid organ transplants, and critical care unit patients. Accordingly, these guidelines have focused on patients at risk for C/IC, and on approaches of prevention, early therapy for suspected but unproven infection, and targeted therapy for probable and proven infection.

Diagnosis of invasive candidiasis in the ICU

Invasive candidiasis ranges from 5 to 10 cases per 1,000 ICU admissions and represents 5% to 10% of all ICU-acquired infections, with an overall mortality comparable to that of severe sepsis/septic shock. A large majority of them are due to Candida albicans, but the proportion of strains with decreased sensitivity or resistance to fluconazole is increasingly reported. A high proportion of ICU patients become colonized, but only 5% to 30% of them develop an invasive infection. Progressive colonization and major abdominal surgery are common risk factors, but invasive candidiasis is difficult to predict and early diagnosis remains a major challenge. Indeed, blood cultures are positive in a minority of cases and often late in the course of infection. New nonculture-based laboratory techniques may contribute to early diagnosis and management of invasive candidiasis. Both serologic (mannan, antimannan, and betaglucan) and molecular (Candida-specific PCR in blood and serum) have been applied as serial screening procedures in high-risk patients. However, although reasonably sensitive and specific, these techniques are largely investigational and their clinical usefulness remains to be established. Identification of patients susceptible to benefit from empirical antifungal treatment remains challenging, but it is mandatory to avoid antifungal overuse in critically ill patients. Growing evidence suggests that monitoring the dynamic of Candida colonization in surgical patients and prediction rules based on combined risk factors may be used to identify ICU patients at high risk of invasive candidiasis susceptible to benefit from prophylaxis or preemptive antifungal treatment.

Intra-abdominal fungal infections complicating acute pancreatitis: a review

Intra-abdominal infections of pancreatic or peripancreatic necrotic tissue complicate the clinical course of severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) and are associated with significant morbidity. Fungal infection of necrotic pancreatic tissue is increasingly being reported. The incidence of intra-abdominal pancreatic fungal infection (PFI) varies from 5% to 68.5%. Candida albicans is the most frequently isolated fungus in patients with necrotizing pancreatitis. Prolonged use of prophylactic antibiotics, prolonged placement of chronic indwelling devices, and minimally invasive or surgical interventions for pancreatic fluid collections further increase the risk of PFI. Computed tomography- or ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of pancreatic necrosis is a safe, reliable method for establishing pancreatic infection. Amphotericin B appears to be the most effective antifungal treatment. Drainage and debridement of infected necrosis are also critical for eradication of fungi from the poorly perfused pancreatic or peripancreatic tissues where the antifungal agents may not reach to achieve therapeutic levels. Fungal infection adversely affects the outcome of patients with SAP and is associated with increased morbidity, although the mortality rate is not increased specifically because of PFI. Although antifungal prophylaxis has been suggested for patients on broad-spectrum antibiotics, no randomized controlled trials have yet studied its efficacy in preventing PFI.

Fungal infections in severe acute pancreatitis

Severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. The majority of deaths related to SAP are the result of infectious complications. Although bacterial infections are most commonly encountered, fungal infections are increasingly being recognized. Candida is the most common fungal infection. The occurrence of fungal infection in patients with acute pancreatitis adversely affects the clinical course, leading to a higher incidence of systemic complications, and possibly mortality as well. Important risk factors for fungal infection in patients with acute pancreatitis include broad-spectrum antibiotics, prolonged hospitalization and surgical/endoscopic interventions, use of total parenteral nutrition, and mechanical ventilation. Patients with higher severity of pancreatitis are at a greater risk. The pathogenesis of fungal infection in patients with acute pancreatitis is multifactorial. Translocation of microorganisms across the gut epithelium, lymphocyte dysfunction, and the virulence of the invading microorganisms play important roles. Histological demonstration of fungi remains the gold standard of diagnosis, but a positive biopsy is rarely obtained. The role of biomarkers in the diagnosis is being investigated. As early diagnosis and treatment can lead to improved outcome, a high index of suspicion is required for prompt diagnosis. Limiting the use of broad-spectrum antibiotics, early introduction of enteral nutrition, and timely change of vascular catheters are important preventive strategies. The role of antifungal prophylaxis remains controversial. Surgical necrosectomy with antifungal therapy is the most widely used treatment approach. Clinical trials on antifungal prophylaxis are needed, and indications for surgical intervention need to be clearly defined.

[Severe and acute pancreatitis admitted in intensive care: a prospective epidemiological multiple centre study using CClin network database]

OBJECTIVES

To describe the demographic characteristics, incidence of extra-abdominal hospital-acquired infections and outcome of patients admitted to intensive care unit (ICU) with severe acute pancreatitis.

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective, observational multiple center (65 centers) analysis of prospectively acquired data.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

During 2 years, all consecutive admitted patients to ICU for severe acute pancreatitis in the centers participating in the nosocomial infections surveillance network CClin Sud-Est were included. Patients whose ICU stay was less than 48 hours were not included. Demographic characteristics, extra-abdominal hospital-acquired infections and clinical course were described.

RESULTS

During the study period, 510 patients were included which represented 2 % of patients with a length of stay longer than 48 hours in the 65 participating ICUs. The global attack rate of extra-abdominal hospital-acquired infections (pneumonia, bacteremia, urinary tract or central venous catheter infection) was 23 % in overall patients and it was 33 % in the 294 mechanically ventilated patients. ICU mortality was 20 % in overall patients and it was 34 % in mechanically ventilated patients.

CONCLUSION

Severe acute pancreatitis represents 2 % of ICU stay longer than 48 hours. Its clinical course is frequently complicated by hospital-acquired infections and is associated with an high ICU mortality rate. This epidemiological observational study may be used for calculating sample size for future multicenter interventional therapeutic studies.

Invasive candidiasis in non-hematological patients

Candida is one of the most frequent pathogens isolated in bloodstream infections, and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. In addition to haematological patients, there are several other populations with a substantial risk of developing invasive candidiasis (IC). These include patients undergoing prolonged hospitalisation with the use of broad-spectrum antibiotics, those fitted with intravascular catheters, admitted to both adult and neonate intensive care units (ICU) or gastrointestinal surgery wards and subjects with solid tumours undergoing cytotoxic chemotherapy. As a general rule, every immunocompromised patient might be at risk of Candida infection, including, for example, diabetic patients.

The epidemiology of species responsible for IC has been changing, both at local and worldwide level, shifting from C. albicans to non-albicans species, that can be intrinsically resistant to fluconazole (C. krusei and, to some extent, C. glabrata), difficult to eradicate because of biofilm production (C. parapsilosis) or than might acquire resistance to azole during therapy.

Delaying the specific therapy has been shown to increase morbidity and mortality, but traditional microbiological diagnosis is poorly sensitive and slow. Thus, culture-based treatment may result in therapy started too late. In order to reduce the mortality in IC, several management strategies have been developed: prophylaxis, empirical and pre-emptive therapy. Compared to prophylaxis, the latter approaches allow to reduce the use of antifungals by targeting only patients at very high risk of IC. Non-invasive serological markers and scores based on clinical prediction rules such as the presence of risk factors or Candida colonisation, have been developed with the aim of allowing prompt initiation of treatment. Although the use of these diagnostic tools in pre-emptive strategies is promising, the performance and cost-effectiveness should be tested in large trials.

Agents recommended for initial treatment of candidemia in severely ill patients include echinocandins and lipid formulations of amphotericin B, while stable patients without risk factors for azole-resistance might be treated with fluconazole.

The use of antibiotics for acute pancreatitis: is there a role?

Infections due to pancreatic necrosis and abscesses are observed in one third of patients with severe acute pancreatitis (SAP). Based on results of double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trials, antibiotic prophylaxis in SAP is ineffective for reducing the frequency of infected necrosis and to decrease hospital mortality. Antibiotic treatment using carbapenems and quinolones is indicated on demand in patients with SAP and multiorgan failure at admission and in those with hemodynamic shock. Patients with biliary acute pancreatitis (AP) and clinically acute cholecystitis and/or cholangitis benefit from antibiotic treatment. Patients with AP associated with bacteremia, positive bronchoalveolar lavage, and urinary tract infection should receive antibiotics. In necrotizing pancreatitis, evidence-based data do not support late use of antibiotic prophylaxis after onset. Further high-quality, randomized, controlled trials are needed to evaluate antibiotic prophylaxis in the first 24 to 48 hours after SAP onset.

Fundamental and intensive care of acute pancreatitis

Patients who have been diagnosed as having acute pancreatitis should be, on principle, hospitalized. Crucial fundamental management is required soon after a diagnosis of acute pancreatitis has been made and includes monitoring of the conscious state, the respiratory and cardiovascular system, the urinary output, adequate fluid replacement and pain control. Along with such management, etiologic diagnosis and severity assessment should be conducted. Patients with a diagnosis of severe acute pancreatitis should be transferred to a medical facility where intensive respiratory and cardiovascular management as well as interventional treatment, blood purification therapy and nutritional support are available. The disease condition in acute pancreatitis changes every moment and even symptoms that are mild at the time of diagnosis may become severe later. Therefore, severity assessment should be conducted repeatedly at least within 48 h following diagnosis. An adequate dose of fluid replacement is essential to stabilize cardiovascular dynamics and the dose should be adjusted while assessing circulatory dynamics constantly. A large dose of fluid replacement is usually required in patients with severe acute pancreatitis. Prophylactic antibiotic administration is recommended to prevent infectious complications in patients with severe acute pancreatitis. Although the efficacy of intravenous administration of protease inhibitors is still a matter of controversy, there is a consensus in Japan that a large dose of a synthetic protease inhibitor should be given to patients with severe acute pancreatitis in order to prevent organ failure and other complications. Enteral feeding is superior to parenteral nutrition when it comes to the nutritional support of patients with severe acute pancreatitis. The JPN Guidelines recommend, as optional continuous regional arterial infusion and blood purification therapy.

Treatment strategy for acute pancreatitis

When a diagnosis of acute pancreatitis (AP) is made, fundamental medical treatment consisting of fasting, intravenous (IV) fluid replacement, and analgesics with a close monitoring of vital signs should be immediately started. In parallel with fundamental medical treatment, assessment of severity based on clinical signs, blood test, urinalysis and imaging tests should be performed to determine the way of treatment for each patient. A repeat evaluation of severity is important since the condition is unstable especially in the early stage of AP. At the time of initial diagnosis, the etiology should be investigated by means of blood test, urinalysis and diagnostic imaging. If a biliary pancreatitis accompanied with acute cholangitis or biliary stasis is diagnosed or suspected, an early endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with or without endoscopic sphincterotomy (ERCP/ES) is recommended in addition to the fundamental medical treatment. In mild cases, the fundamental medical treatment should be continued until clinical symptom is subsided with normal laboratory data. In cases with severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) referral should be considered to medical centers experienced in the treatment of SAP, and intensive care is recommended for preventing both organ failures and infectious complications. Hemodynamic stabilization with vigorous fluid resuscitation, respiratory support and antibiotics are the major parts of intensive care in the early period of SAP. Continuous hemodiafiltration (CHDF) and continuous regional arterial infusion (CRAI) of protease inhibitor and/or antibiotics may be effective to improve pathophysiology of AP especially in the early stage of the disease. In the late stage of AP, infectious complications are critical. If an infectious complication is suspected based on clinical signs, blood test and imaging, a fine needle aspiration (FNA) is recommended to establish a diagnosis. The accuracy of FNA is reported to be 89 ~ 100%. For patients with sterile pancreatitis, non-surgical treatment should be indicated. For patients with infected pancreatic necrosis, therapeutic intervention either by percutaneous, endoscopic, laparoscopic or surgical approach are indicated. The most preferred surgical intervention is necrosectomy, however, non-surgical treatment with antibiotics is still the treatment of choice if the general condition is stable. Necrosectomy should be performed as late as possible. For patients with pancreatic abscess, drainage is recommended.

Outcomes of intra-abdominal fungal vs. bacterial infections in severe acute pancreatitis

OBJECTIVES

Intra-abdominal infection in severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) has significant morbidity and mortality; however, reports conflict on the outcome of patients with intra-abdominal fungal infection (IFI). We aimed to compare the morbidity and mortality of IFI compared with intra-abdominal bacterial infection (IBI) and no intra-abdominal infection (NII) in patients with SAP.

METHODS

Medical records of 207 consecutive patients admitted with SAP (per the Atlanta classification) to the Mayo Clinic (Rochester, Minnesota) between 1992 and 2001 were reviewed. All intra-abdominal microbiology cultures from pancreatic and peri-pancreatic necrosis, abscess, and/or pseudocyst obtained at operation, endoscopic necrosectomy or computed tomography-guided aspiration were reviewed. Patients were divided into three groups-IFI, IBI, and NII. Primary fungal infections were those for which there had been no prior abdominal interventions, and secondary infections were those that followed a prior intervention. Our main outcome was in-hospital mortality and secondary outcomes included the presence of organ failure (OF), need for surgical intervention, need for intensive care unit (ICU) care, and duration of hospitalization.

RESULTS

The groups were similar in terms of baseline characteristics, use of prophylactic antibiotics, use of enteral/parenteral nutrition, development of necrosis, and peripancreatic fluid collections. Fifty-two percent of patients had an intra-abdominal infection; all of these developed bacterial infections and 30 (15%) developed concomitant fungal infections. There were 7 primary fungal infections and 23 secondary infections-no important outcome differences were noted between these groups. Compared with patients with IBI, patients with IFI had longer hospital (63 vs. 37 days, P<0.01) and ICU (28 vs. 9 days, P<0.01) stays and higher rates of OF (73 vs. 47%, P<0.04), but similar mortality rates (20 vs. 17%, P0.41). Multivariate analysis revealed the presence of OF (odds ratio (OR) 2.4, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1,7) and the need for ICU care (OR 4.3, 95% CI 1,28) to be associated with IFI.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with SAP and IFI suffered greater in-hospital morbidity than did patients with IBI alone. Concomitant fungal infection, however, did not increase the in-hospital mortality rate.

[Antibiotic therapy in acute pancreatitis]

Infected pancreatic necrosis (IPN) is one of the main causes of mortality in patients with acute pancreatitis (AP). The choice of antibiotic therapy in AP should be based on penetration of the drug in the pancreas and the degree of coverage provided against the typical bacterial flora produced in IPN. Drugs such as imipenem, ciprofloxacin and metronidazole have been widely studied and seem to be ideal in the treatment of INP. Clinical practice guidelines recommend a carbapenem agent as the initial empirical treatment. When Gram-positive pathogens are isolated in pancreatic samples, vancomycin can be used alone or associated with a carbapenem. Currently, prophylactic antibiotic therapy for IPN is not supported by the scientific evidence, since both the best quality studies (double-blind) and the latest meta-analysis published have found no benefit of the use of this strategy.

Prevalence and outcome of fungal infection in patients with severe acute pancreatitis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

To study the prevalence of risk factors and outcome of fungal infections in patients with severe acute pancreatitis.

METHODS

Fifty consecutive patients with severe acute pancreatitis were investigated for evidence of fungal infection by weekly culture of body fluids and aspirate from pancreatic/peripancreatic tissue and samples collected at necrosectomy. All patients were managed as per a standard protocol. Patients with documented fungal infection were treated with intravenous amphotericin or fluconazole. Data were analyzed using SPSS software (version 13), and risk factors for fungal infection and mortality were determined.

RESULTS

Fungal infection was documented in 18 (36%) of 50 patients with Candida albicans (the commonest species). The incidence of fungal infection steadily increased with increasing duration of hospital stay. Those with fungal infection more often had evidence of respiratory failure (P = 0.031) and hypotension (P = 0.031) at admission, prolonged hospital stay > 4 weeks (P = 0.034), longer duration of antibiotics (P = 0.003), received total parenteral nutrition (P = 0.005), and required mechanical ventilation (P = 0.001) in contrast to those without fungal infection. The logistic regression analysis found the independent risk factors for fungal infection to be antibiotic therapy for > 4 weeks and hypotension at hospitalization. Of the 18 patients with fungal infection, 13 were administered intravenous antifungals; eight of these patients survived, while the five who did not receive antifungals died.

CONCLUSION

Fungal infection was detected in 36% of our patients. The independent risk factors associated with it were hypotension at hospitalization and prolonged antibiotic therapy. Antifungal therapy improved their chances of survival.

[Is the use of antifungal management advisable in critical patients with positive isolation of Candida spp. from intraabdominal clinical samples?]

The diagnostic and therapeutic approaches to IFI have changed significantly in recent years, fostered by the introduction of new diagnostic methods and new antifungal products. The diagnosis of invasive candidiasis (IC) involves both clinical and laboratory parameters, but neither of these are specific and the majority of the yeast isolated showed only colonization but not true infection. This situation occurs in critical care setting especially when surgical drainages are used. A substantial number of patients become colonized with Candida spp. after abdominal surgery, but only a minority subsequently develops invasive candidiasis. The clinical and microbiological diagnosis of Candida peritonitis remains problematic. It is still unclear which patients with may benefit from antifungal treatment. Antifungal therapy can be suggested in critically ill patients with peritonitis where Candida is diagnosed based on perioperatively sampled peritoneal fluid. Since fungal infection is also a relatively common complication of severe pancreatitis it seems reasonable that fungal prophylaxis may be an important component of management although actually there is no evidence to support this approach. However, the high mortality associated with IC is partly correlated to the difficulties of making an early diagnosis, thus, to improve earlier diagnosis and survival of IC, new nonculture-based microbiological tools such as Candida albicans germ tube antibodies (CAGTA) and/or polymerase chain reaction (PCR) techniques for the detection of fungal-specific DNA should be used in conjunction with recent published "Candida score" prediction rule. An algorithm based on this approach has been provided to assess early treatment in surgical patients with yeasts isolated from intra-abdominal samples.

Single-drug therapy or selective decontamination of the digestive tract as antifungal prophylaxis in critically ill patients: a systematic review

Introduction

The objective of this study was to determine and compare the effectiveness of different prophylactic antifungal therapies in critically ill patients on the incidence of yeast colonisation, infection, candidemia, and hospital mortality.

Methods

A systematic review was conducted of prospective trials including adult non-neutropenic patients, comparing single-drug antifungal prophylaxis (SAP) or selective decontamination of the digestive tract (SDD) with controls and with each other.

Results

Thirty-three studies were included (11 SAP and 22 SDD; 5,529 patients). Compared with control groups, both SAP and SDD reduced the incidence of yeast colonisation (SAP: odds ratio [OR] 0.38, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.20 to 0.70; SDD: OR 0.12, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.29) and infection (SAP: OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.75; SDD: OR 0.29, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.45). Treatment effects were significantly larger in SDD trials than in SAP trials. The incidence of candidemia was reduced by SAP (OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.82) but not by SDD (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.25 to 1.40). In-hospital mortality was reduced predominantly by SDD (OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.93, numbers needed to treat 15; SAP: OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.00). Effectiveness of prophylaxis reduced with an increased proportion of included surgical patients.

Conclusion

Antifungal prophylaxis (SAP or SDD) is effective in reducing yeast colonisation and infections across a range of critically ill patients. Indirect comparisons suggest that SDD is more effective in reducing yeast-related outcomes, except for candidemia.

Severe acute pancreatitis: Clinical course and management

Severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) develops in about 25% of patients with acute pancreatitis (AP). Severity of AP is linked to the presence of systemic organ dysfunctions and/or necrotizing pancreatitis pathomorphologically. Risk factors determining independently the outcome of SAP are early multi-organ failure, infection of necrosis and extended necrosis (>50%). Up to one third of patients with necrotizing pancreatitis develop in the late course infection of necroses. Morbidity of SAP is biphasic, in the first week strongly related to early and persistence of organ or multi-organ dysfunction. Clinical sepsis caused by infected necrosis leading to multi-organ failure syndrome (MOFS) occurs in the later course after the first week. To predict sepsis, MOFS or deaths in the first 48-72 h, the highest predictive accuracy has been objectified for procalcitonin and IL-8; the Sepsis-Related Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA)-score predicts the outcome in the first 48 h, and provides a daily assessment of treatment response with a high positive predictive value. Contrast-enhanced CT provides the highest diagnostic accuracy for necrotizing pancreatitis when performed after the first week of disease. Patients who suffer early organ dysfunctions or at risk of developing a severe disease require early intensive care treatment. Early vigorous intravenous fluid replacement is of foremost importance. The goal is to decrease the hematocrit or restore normal cardiocirculatory functions. Antibiotic prophylaxis has not been shown as an effective preventive treatment. Early enteral feeding is based on a high level of evidence, resulting in a reduction of local and systemic infection. Patients suffering infected necrosis causing clinical sepsis, pancreatic abscess or surgical acute abdomen are candidates for early intervention. Hospital mortality of SAP after interventional or surgical debridement has decreased in high volume centers to below 20%.

Severe acute pancreatitis: Clinical course and management

Severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) develops in about 25% of patients with acute pancreatitis (AP). Severity of AP is linked to the presence of systemic organ dysfunctions and/or necrotizing pancreatitis pathomorphologically. Risk factors determining independently the outcome of SAP are early multi-organ failure, infection of necrosis and extended necrosis (> 50%). Up to one third of patients with necrotizing pancreatitis develop in the late course infection of necroses. Morbidity of SAP is biphasic, in the first week strongly related to early and persistence of organ or multi-organ dysfunction. Clinical sepsis caused by infected necrosis leading to multi-organ failure syndrome (MOFS) occurs in the later course after the first week. To predict sepsis, MOFS or deaths in the first 48-72 h, the highest predictive accuracy has been objectified for procalcitonin and IL-8; the Sepsis-Related Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA)-score predicts the outcome in the first 48 h, and provides a daily assessment of treatment response with a high positive predictive value. Contrast-enhanced CT provides the highest diagnostic accuracy for necrotizing pancreatitis when performed after the first week of disease. Patients who suffer early organ dysfunctions or at risk of developing a severe disease require early intensive care treatment. Early vigorous intravenous fluid replacement is of foremost importance. The goal is to decrease the hematocrit or restore normal cardiocirculatory functions. Antibiotic prophylaxis has not been shown as an effective preventive treatment. Early enteral feeding is based on a high level of evidence, resulting in a reduction of local and systemic infection. Patients suffering infected necrosis causing clinical sepsis, pancreatic abscess or surgical acute abdomen are candidates for early intervention. Hospital mortality of SAP after interventional or surgical debridement has decreased in high volume centers to below 20%.

Prevention of infectious complications in severe acute pancreatitis with systemic antibiotics: where are we now?

Infectious complications are the leading cause of death in patients with severe acute pancreatitis. Currently, there is controversy concerning the therapeutic possibilities to reduce the incidence of bacterial infection in this disease. Numerous studies are available which apparently support the prophylactic use of antibiotics in patients with necrotizing pancreatitis. The results, however, are contradicting and interpretation is difficult as these studies have used various antibiotic drugs with different application schemes and heterogeneous study end points. This article gives a critical overview of the background of antibiotic treatment in severe acute pancreatitis, the published data on antibiotic treatment and an outlook on the topics that need to be addressed by future research.

Pro/con debate: antifungal prophylaxis is important to prevent fungal infection in patients with acute necrotizing pancreatitis receiving broad-spectrum antibiotics

When critically ill patients with pancreatitis develop infection of the pancreas, the ongoing management of such patients becomes difficult. Sufficient evidence supports the use of broad-spectrum antibiotic prophylaxis to prevent the development of bacterial infection. Since fungal infection is also a relatively common complication of severe pancreatitis--particularly when broad-spectrum antibiotics are used--it seems logical that fungal prophylaxis may be an important component of management. In this issue of Critical Care, two expert groups debate the merits of antifungal prophylaxis in patients with acute necrotizing pancreatitis who are receiving antibiotics.

JPN Guidelines for the management of acute pancreatitis: medical management of acute pancreatitis

The basic principles of the initial management of acute pancreatitis are adequate monitoring of vital signs, fluid replacement, correction of any electrolyte imbalance, nutritional support, and the prevention of local and systemic complications. Patients with severe acute pancreatitis should be transferred to a medical facility where adequate monitoring and intensive medical care are available. Strict cardiovascular and respiratory monitoring is mandatory for maintaining the cardiopulmonary system in patients with severe acute pancreatitis. Maximum fluid replacement is needed to stabilize the cardiovascular system. Prophylactic antibiotic administration is recommended to prevent infectious complications in patients with necrotizing pancreatitis. Although the efficacy of the intravenous administration of protease inhibitors is still a matter of controversy, there is a consensus in Japan that a large dose of a synthetic protease inhibitor should be given to patients with severe acute pancreatitis in order to prevent organ failure and other complications. Enteral feeding is superior to parenteral nutrition when it comes to the nutritional support of patients with severe acute pancreatitis. The JPN Guidelines recommend, as optional measures, blood purification therapy and continuous regional arterial infusion of a protease inhibitor and antibiotics, depending on the patient's condition.

Antifungal prophylaxis with azoles in high-risk, surgical intensive care unit patients: A meta-analysis of randomized, placebo-controlled trials*

OBJECTIVE

The use of antifungal prophylaxis remains controversial in most populations including surgical intensive care unit patients. A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials was performed to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of azoles as antifungal prophylaxis in high-risk patients receiving treatment in the surgical intensive care unit.

DATA SOURCE

Data were obtained from PubMed, Current Contents, Cochrane central register of controlled trials, and references from relevant articles.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized controlled trials using azoles as antifungal prophylaxis vs. placebo were included in the study.

DATA EXTRACTION

Two independent reviewers extracted data concerning the development of fungal infections (superficial or invasive), adverse effects, and mortality.

SYNTHESIS

Six randomized controlled trials were included in the main analysis. Publication bias and statistically significant heterogeneity were not observed among the analyzed studies. Patients receiving antifungal prophylaxis developed fewer episodes of candidemia (odds ratio [OR] = 0.28, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.09-0.86), nonbloodstream invasive fungal infections (OR = 0.26, 95% CI 0.12-0.53), and noninvasive (superficial) fungal infections (OR = 0.22, 95% CI 0.11-0.43), respectively. No reduction in mortality was observed among patients who received azole prophylaxis (OR = 0.74, 95% CI 0.52-1.05). There was no significant difference in reported adverse effects (OR = 1.28, 95% CI 0.82-1.98).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite its limitations, our meta-analysis suggests that the prophylactic use of azoles in high-risk surgical intensive care unit patients is associated with a reduction of fungal infections but not in all-cause mortality. However, although not noted in the analyzed randomized controlled trials, there is concern about the use of azoles due to possible shift toward non-albicans species and development of resistance to azoles.

Antifungal agents for preventing fungal infections in non-neutropenic critically ill and surgical patients: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to systematically identify and summarize the effects of antifungal prophylaxis in non-neutropenic critically ill adult patients on all-cause mortality and the incidence of invasive fungal infections.

METHODS

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials in all languages comparing the prophylactic use of any antifungal agent or regimen with placebo, no antifungal or another antifungal agent or regimen in non-neutropenic critically ill adult patients. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library, Issue 3, 2005), MEDLINE (1966 to 2 September 2005) and EMBASE (1980 to week 36, 2005). We also hand-searched reference lists, abstracts of conference proceedings and scientific meetings (1998-2004) and contacted authors of included studies and pharmaceutical manufacturers. The primary outcomes assessed were all-cause mortality and proven invasive fungal infections. Two reviewers independently applied selection criteria, performed quality assessment and extracted data using an intention-to-treat approach. Data were synthesized using the random effects model and expressed as relative risk with 95% confidence intervals.

RESULTS

Twelve unique trials (eight comparing fluconazole and four ketoconazole with no antifungal or a non-absorbable agent) involving 1606 randomized patients were included. For both outcomes of total mortality and invasive fungal infections, almost all trials of fluconazole and ketoconazole separately showed a non-significant risk reduction with prophylaxis. When combined, fluconazole/ketoconazole reduced total mortality by one-quarter (relative risk 0.76, 95% confidence interval 0.59-0.97) and invasive fungal infections by about one-half (relative risk 0.46, 95% confidence interval 0.31-0.68). No significant increase in the incidence of infection or colonization with the azole-resistant fungal pathogens Candida glabrata or Candida krusei was demonstrated, although the confidence intervals of the summary effect measures were wide. Adverse effects requiring treatment discontinuation were not more common amongst patients receiving prophylaxis. Results across all trials were homogeneous despite considerable heterogeneity in clinical and methodological characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylaxis with fluconazole or ketoconazole in critically ill patients reduces invasive fungal infections by one-half and total mortality by one-quarter. Although no significant increase in azole-resistant Candida species associated with prophylaxis was demonstrated, trials were not powered to exclude such an effect. In patients at increased risk of invasive fungal infections, antifungal prophylaxis with fluconazole should be considered.

Antifungal agents for preventing fungal infections in non-neutropenic critically ill patients

BACKGROUND

Invasive fungal infections, important causes of morbidity and mortality in critically ill patients, may be preventable with the prophylactic administration of antifungal agents.

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to systematically identify and summarize the effects of antifungal prophylaxis in non-neutropenic critically ill adult patients on all-cause mortality and the incidence of invasive fungal infections.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), (The Cochrane Library, Issue 3, 2005), MEDLINE (1966 to 2 September 2005), and EMBASE (1980 to week 36, 2005). We also handsearched reference lists, abstracts of conference proceedings and scientific meetings (1998 to 2004), and contacted authors of included studies and pharmaceutical manufacturers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials in all languages comparing the prophylactic use of any antifungal agent or regimen with placebo, no antifungal, or another antifungal agent or regimen in non-neutropenic critically ill adult patients.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently applied selection criteria, performed quality assessment, and extracted data using an intention-to-treat approach. We resolved differences by discussion. We synthesized data using the random effects model and expressed results as relative risk with 95% confidence intervals.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 12 unique trials (eight comparing fluconazole and four ketoconazole with no antifungal or a nonabsorbable agent) involving 1606 randomized patients. For both outcomes of total mortality and invasive fungal infections, almost all trials of fluconazole and ketoconazole separately showed a non-significant risk reduction with prophylaxis. When combined, fluconazole/ketoconazole reduced total mortality by about 25% (relative risk 0.76, 95% confidence interval 0.59 to 0.97) and invasive fungal infections by about 50% (relative risk 0.46, 95% confidence interval 0.31 to 0.68). We identified no significant increase in the incidence of infection or colonization with the azole-resistant fungal pathogens Candida glabrata or C. krusei, although the confidence intervals of the summary effect measures were wide. Adverse effects were not more common amongst patients receiving prophylaxis. Results across all trials were homogeneous despite considerable heterogeneity in clinical and methodological characteristics.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Prophylaxis with fluconazole or ketoconazole in critically ill patients reduces invasive fungal infections by one half and total mortality by one quarter. Although no significant increase in azole-resistant Candida species associated with prophylaxis was demonstrated, trials were not powered to exclude such an effect. In patients at increased risk of invasive fungal infections, antifungal prophylaxis with fluconazole should be considered.

The use of prophylactic fluconazole in immunocompetent high-risk surgical patients: a meta-analysis

Introduction

High-risk surgical patients are at increased risk of fungal infections and candidaemia. Evidence from observational and small randomised controlled studies suggests that prophylactic fluconazole may be effective in reducing fungal infection and mortality. We evaluated the effects of prophylactic fluconazole on the incidence of candidaemia and hospital mortality in immunocompetent high-risk surgical patients.

Methods

Randomised controlled studies involving the use of fluconazole in immunocompetent high-risk surgical patients from the Cochrane Controlled Trial Register (2005, issue 1) and from the EMBASE and MEDLINE databases (1966–30 April 2005), without any language restriction, were included. Two reviewers reviewed the quality of the studies and performed data extraction independently.

Results

Seven randomised controlled studies with a total of 814 immunocompetent high-risk surgical patients were considered. The use of prophylactic fluconazole was associated with a reduction in the proportion of patients with candidaemia (relative risk [RR] = 0.21, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.06–0.72, P = 0.01; I² = 0%) and fungal infections other than lower urinary tract infection (RR = 0.39, 95% CI = 0.24–0.65, P = 0.0003; I² = 0%), but was associated with only a trend towards a reduction in hospital mortality (RR = 0.82, 95% CI = 0.62–1.08, P = 0.15; I² = 7%). The proportion of patients requiring systemic amphotericin B as a rescue therapy for systemic fungal infection was lower after prophylactic use of fluconazole (RR = 0.35, 95% CI = 0.17–0.72, P = 0.004; I² = 0%). The proportion of patients colonised with or infected with fluconazole-resistant fungi was not significantly different between the fluconazole group and the placebo group (RR = 0.66, 95% CI = 0.22–1.96, P = 0.46; I² = 0%).

Conclusion

The use of prophylactic fluconazole in immunocompetent high-risk surgical patients is associated with a reduced incidence of candidaemia but with only a trend towards a reduction in hospital mortality.

Prophylaxis of Candida infections in adult trauma and surgical intensive care patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether systemic antifungal prophylaxis decreases infectious morbidity and mortality in nonneutropenic, critically ill, trauma and surgical intensive care unit (ICU) adult patients.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. We used a fixed effect model, with risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI).

PARTICIPANTS

Patients admitted to ICU after surgery or trauma, with multiple risk factors for fungal infections.

INTERVENTIONS

Nine studies (seven double blind) with a total of 1,226 patients compared ketoconazole (three) or fluconazole (six) to placebo (eight) or no treatment (one).

RESULTS

Prophylaxis with azole was associated with reduced rates of candidemia (RR 0.30, 95% CI 0.10-0.82), mortality attributable to Candida infection (RR 0.25, 95% CI 0.08-0.80), and overall mortality (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.45-0.81). Time to event analysis showed a significantly lower probability of fungal infections in treated patients. There was no evidence of statistical heterogeneity between studies, and publication bias assessment gave a negative results. There was, however, wide variability in the definition and reporting of some relevant clinical outcomes (e.g., confirmed or suspected infections, colonization) and pooling of these outcome measures was not feasible.

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylaxis of candidal infection among critically ill ICU patients has beneficial effect on certain outcome measures, but additional data from well designed clinical trials and long-term epidemiological observations are needed to provide firm recommendations for the selection of subgroups of patients who would most benefit from prophylaxis and to determine the effect of prophylaxis on fungal resistance patterns.

Pilzinfektion bei hamorrhagisch-nekrotisierender Pankreatitis: Risikofaktoren, Inzidenz, Therapie. Fungal infections in patients with necrotizing pancreatitis: risk-factors, incidence, therapy

Haemorraghic necrotizing pancreatitis may lead to a serious disease with multi-organ failure, which is to be treated with intensive care. Patients suffering from infected necrosis are usually operated (necrosectomy). By doing this, it is possible to get a microbiological analysis. The most common virulent species are Enterobacteriaceae. According to the literature, fungal infections appear in 15-30% of the cases. Since 1996, 73 patients were treated surgically in our department. A number of 50 patients (68,5%) developed a fungal infection during the course of the disease. The mortality rate was 62%.

ICU management of severe acute pancreatitis

In intensive care medicine, severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) remains a very challenging disease with multiple complications and high mortality. The main pathophysiological mechanisms determining outcome are an uncontrolled systemic hyperinflammatory response early on and infection of pancreatic necrosis later on in the disease process. Despite a better understanding in recent years of the mechanisms and the mediators involved in the hyperinflammatory response, there is, as yet, no generally recognized specific treatment for this disease. Since early identification and aggressive treatment of associated organ dysfunction can have a major impact on outcome, early assessment of prognosis and severity is important. The evidence available indicates that patients with severe acute pancreatitis do not benefit from therapy with available antisecretory drugs or protease inhibitors. Supportive therapy, such as vigorous hydration, analgesia, correction of electrolyte and glycemia disorders, and pharmacological or mechanical support targeted at specific organs, is still the mainstay of therapy. In spite of meager evidence, prophylactic antibiotics with good penetration in pancreatic tissue are recommended in severe acute pancreatitis. Enteral nutrition via a nasojejunal tube has become the preferred route of feeding. Most patients with sterile necrosis do not benefit from surgical intervention. In patients with proven infection of pancreatic tissue, surgery is necessary. Percutaneous, radiological drainage techniques may eventually become an alternative form of drainage in selected patients.